Actually I think he is right and you are wrong in this case. The section of DeLong's essay that Krugman quotes in his article though is the claim that Bitcoin was designed as a weapon against government central banks and their ability to tax, and to monitor citizen financial transations. The article "Bitcoin is Evil" was written not to ask "does bitcoin work" but "is bitcoin morally bad or good?" And Krugman says "bad" because he believes it would undermine the government's ability to use monetary policy to achieve various goals.
> The section of DeLong's essay that Krugman quotes in his article though is the claim that Bitcoin was designed as a weapon against government central banks and their ability to tax
No, the section of DeLong's writing that Krugman quoted didn't deal with that, it dealt with the ceiling/floor issue I described; this was in the section of Krugman's piece discussing the postivist evaluation of bitcoin's ability to function as a stable store of value.
What you seem to be describing is the excerpt of Charlie Stross's work that Krugman quotes in the shorter bit at the end where Krugman is discussing normative evaluation of bitcoin's purposes.
Charlie Stross and Brad DeLong are two different people, and Krugman cites them for very different purposes. (One about bitcoin's purpose and one about bitcoin's functional properties.)
